I’ve been thinking about what we call the “Kingdom of God” quite a bit recently. Well, for the past several months actually. This is what I’ve noticed. We do a great job of describing what the kingdom is, what it should be, and how it might look when actualized or realized within a given local context. We do a wonderful job talking about a type of alternative, subversive, counter-cultural reality and how it can function if we commit ourselves wholly to its cause. We’ve written books, given sermons, conducted interviews, and yes we’ve even blogged about it. And that is great. That is good. We need to be doing that. I hope we never quit.
But here’s the thing. We still use the old language. We still describe this alternative reality as a “kingdom.” And though some of us very effectively contextualize what “the kingdom” might look like in our locality, we still use the archaic term conjuring up ancient images of feudalism and chivalry whether we realize it or not. We need different language.
The bottom line is virtually no one can relate to a phrase like “the kingdom of God” anymore. It means nothing to us. It’s not as visceral and indigenous to us as it was to a peasant in 1st century Palestine. It just doesn’t resonate anymore. Most importantly, it doesn’t overtly challenge the status quo as it did when Jesus first spoke of it. At that time, simply uttering the phrase “the kingdom of God” was jarring in itself. Today we utter the phrase but feel the need to qualify it because it doesn’t seem to have the same veracity as it once did.
True we need to change our thinking and realign our interests with the interesting of this “kingdom,” but I think we need a different language in addition to a different framing story. So, over the course of several posts I’d like to suggest a few alternative descriptions that we might use to replace “the kingdom of God” in the here and now. I’m not convinced that there is only once such description, perhaps we need more than one. But we need something. Something that reclaims the original opposition and subversion Jesus intended. Something that will really catch the eye of the Empire. Something that will immediately and directly challenge the legitimacy of the Empire. We need something that is truly counter-cultural. We need something revolutionary.
~bh ><>
14 responses so far ↓
1 josh // Jan 17, 2008 at 9:54 am
brilliant. i’ve been ripping of mclaren’s metaphors from secret message. i especially love dreams of god. but i think some people just roll their eyes at that thinking i’m a mystic or something. but i guess i’d rather make it harder for them to understand than the average person.
2 blake // Jan 17, 2008 at 12:57 pm
josh. the secret message was what first got me turned on to this a while back. up to that point i’d always been preoccupied with what the kingdom “is” and just accepted the traditional nomenclature. which was fine, but it’s only half of it.
i especially like that mclaren uses several descriptions/metaphors (in the secret message and in his latest) to characterize this alternate reality. i’ve grown pretty distrustful of any sort of catch all silver bullet. i just don’t think its that simple and it rules out the possibility of localizing the concept.
3 Friday Is For Friends: Blake Huggins | IAmJoshBrown // Jan 17, 2008 at 11:00 pm
[...] recent post about metaphors and the kingdom of God is good as his thoughts on historicity and Scripture (part 3 of the series). And although [...]
4 Philip brooks // Jan 18, 2008 at 10:56 pm
I believe i have always been raised and told to believe the kingdom of god is what you make of it and want it to be. I thought that always sounded kind of generic to me. So when you say we need new language are you talking in the way the church will define or the way each one of us will define it as a whole? Am i on target with my question?
Pb
5 blake // Jan 19, 2008 at 12:44 am
phil. good question. thanks for the comment.
the overarching idea that i’m kicking around is that we need to drop the “kingdom of god” metaphor, mainly because it is archaic and outdated. we’re not leaving in the middle ages anymore. we don’t participate in a feudalistic society. we don’t live under a monarchy (thank god). the image just doesn’t really have any meaning for us no matter how hard we try to qualify it. and it sure doesn’t pack the kind of meaning and veracity it did in 1st century palestine.
…when you say we need new language are you talking in the way the church will define or the way each one of us will define it as a whole?
i guess i’m talking about both in sense, although i would never be arrogant enough to say that i’m speaking for the church as a whole. i think the language needs to be updated both globally and locally. especially locally. things must be contextualized.
so i think we could use some updated and culturally relevant generic images/metaphors (what the “kingdom of god” used to be) globally, for the church as a whole as well as specific local images that can engage their own contextual narratives.
that’s originally what the kingdom metaphor was meant to do–subverting the dominant cultural myth by using familiar, maybe even conventional, imagery in an unfamiliar, unconventional, and jarring manner.
6 Scott Spencer // Jan 20, 2008 at 7:42 am
Good points, Blake. I will be interested to see where you take us…
The kin-dom of God is laughable.
The Realm of God is in the same boat as “kingdom” (which means what you wrote about kingdom can also be said about “realm”)
So I am looking forward to where you go with this… I have not read McLaren’s stuff yet…
7 blake // Jan 20, 2008 at 11:47 am
scott. thanks for stopping by.
in “the secret message of jesus” (i’m not really enthused about that title, but whatever) as well as his latest “everything must change” mclaren posits a few alternative images/metaphors that can be more visceral and relevant here and now.
i’ll probably start with the more obvious and less jarring metaphors just to retain some readership and then move toward the more subversive and undomesticated possibilities.
8 J.BlakeHuggins » Blog Archive » Kingdom Language: The Community of God // Jan 22, 2008 at 6:58 am
[...] Introduction: It Should Change, But to What? [...]
9 Philip Brooks // Jan 22, 2008 at 9:47 am
Ive been thinking about this post of yours a lot, im very drawn to this subject. I could not agree with you more that we have over used “The Kingdom of God” and this metaphor has just never really done much for me. But it has made me use my imageanation a lot. You are very right we need something grabbing in all different kinds of ways.
Pb
10 J.BlakeHuggins » Kingdom Language: Why it Should be (a)Political // Jan 31, 2008 at 7:03 am
[...] Introduction: It Should Change, But to What? Part I: The Community of God [...]
11 J.BlakeHuggins » Kingdom Language: The Republic of God and the Democracy of God // Feb 8, 2008 at 8:21 am
[...] Introduction | Part I | Part II [...]
12 J.BlakeHuggins » Kingdom Language: The Commonwealth of God & the Castration of Jesus // Feb 12, 2008 at 12:27 am
[...] Introduction | Part I | Part II | Part III [...]
13 J.BlakeHuggins » Kingdom Language: Final Thoughts // Feb 21, 2008 at 12:28 am
[...] Introduction | Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV [...]
14 J.BlakeHuggins » Kingdom Language | Final Links // Feb 26, 2008 at 12:05 am
[...] Introduction: It Should Change, But to What? Part I: The Community of God Part II: Why it Should Be (a)Political Part III: The Republic of God and the Democracy of God Part IV: The Commowealth of God and the Castration of Jesus Part V: Final Thoughts Bookmark It [...]
Leave a Comment